An Answer to Jeremy

In a recent post on his blog, (http://jeremyellul.blogspot.com/) friend and fellow artist Jeremy Ellul posed a couple of questions that I would like to answer. In a nut shell, in his post Living off Art - Daily Bread, he asks....1. if it is wise to abandon one's profession to become a full time artist, and 2. 'Would living off art affect the work i.e. creativity?'

So let's start with question 1. It all depends on how badly you want to become a full time artist. Any commitment to the profession depends only on what the artist is ready to give to it, nothing else. I for one, even though I studied art most of my life, my 'profession' was Interior Design. Studied and worked as an interior designer for nearly 15 years, having my own practice etc. But then, my love and passion towards my art took over and I took the plunge. The experience is similar to bungee jumping without the rope. Most artists shy away from the the jump for many reasons which are not necessarily related to the quality of their work. Family commitments, not being able to run a studio, lack of entrepreneurship skills, don't know from where to start, are only a few of an endless list why artists are afraid of the 'jump'. It is all about choices and personal commitments. Being a full-time artist, especially during the first few years brings with it a certain level of uncertainty that not all are ready to go through. But if you know the profession, or if you're ready to learn fast, it is doable. Artists have to remember one thing, the skills you need to be an architect or a doctor are not the same as those you need to run an architectural studio or a clinic. And it's the same thing with being an artist and running your own studio, being a good artist is not enough. 

And this leads me to question 2. 'Would living off art affect the work i.e. creativity?' I think all of us agree that to do a good job, an artist, among other things, needs to be creative. So we can easily ask the question in another way, would an artist living off art do a good job? Ask the same question to any other profession, would an architect living off architecture do a good job? or would an engineer living off engineering do a good job? Doing a good job and living off something are not necessarily related. Again, it only depends on the artist or the architect or the engineer or the electrician etc. Yet, in architecture, design, engineering, medicine, etc., the best work is nearly always done by the professionals and very rarely by an outsider. So is art, the best work is nearly always done by professional artists. Take all the great work in history as an example. Like most other things, (and maybe more) art requires time. The more time you can dedicate to it, the better your work. And another thing, in art, unlike many other professions, there is no room for mediocrity. Anyone dealing with international galleries knows what I'm saying. 

But let me ask another question, does doing what you want because you don't depend on it makes you a good artist? Would you be able to produce good art because you are not dependent on it? Again, these issues are not necessarily related. 

To be able to make a living off of your art, yes you need to be good at what you do but being a good artist  is not enough. And this is where most artists fail. To be able to make a living off your art, you either need a good manager (which are very hard to find) or you need managerial skills. There is no escaping this.

The Budget - Grants & Investement

During his budget speech, PM Gonzi has announced a number of measures relating to the cultural sphere. Three measures have particularly caught my attention, namely

1. the set up of a Film Fund with an initial grant of Lm100,000 (Euro 232,900)
   
2. the set up of an Art Fund with an initial grant of Lm100,000 (Euro 232,900)
   
3. 0.25 per cent of the expenditure in capital or infrastructural projects must be spent on works of art, infrastructure connected with the creative spheres or on other creative projects

These are definitely positive steps. The fact that we finally have (or will have soon) an Art Fund and a Film Fund will be a big help to Maltese artists. Up until today I could not find any information as to who will be administering these funds, how these funds will be used, how does one apply for them etc. but obviously it is still a bit early. The third point, if administered well, should have a big impact on the art scene in Malta. Just imagine if the same policy were applied to the building of Mater Dei, with a cost of €580 million that would translate into €1.4 million invested directly into the art scene. If I remember correctly a similar measure was introduced during the Great Depression (1920's USA) to sustain artists who were desperately in need of work. Lets hope it will have the same effects here in Malta.
This blog will be definitely following the issues.

The Politics of Art

I have wanted to do this for a long time and finally I have set the ball rolling. Other artists are joining in too.
As artists we are probably the most disorganised and worst represented interest group in Maltese society. We have no unions to defend our interests and no professional body exists that represents our work. Yet, we continuously hear of the need of a cultural policy and of how important Art and Culture are to our islands. But do we hear about artist’s rights? Do we hear about legislation to protect us and our work? Unfortunately, we seldom do. Most of us do not even know what rights we already have and how existing legislation protects us. What about other countries? What’s happening in the rest of Europe? What rights do artists in other countries have, are they better protected?......

of Royalties

With interest I have been following the WGA (Writers Guild of America) strike. I have been fascinated by the mega-bucks corporations’ argument that material posted on the net, on which the corporations make loads of money, is just promotional material. Thus no royalties are paid to the people who wrote it. What a load of BS. For those of you who would like to know more have a look at these videos: Tim Kazurinsky on WGN , the writers of The Office, ot the article “Why the Striking Writers Are Right” by Mark Harris.

So, what has this to do with artists in Malta? The whole issue revolves around royalties. Yes its money; that paper stuff that most artists lack. Are artists entitled to a share of what other people do with their creations? Music composers get a share from the sale of CDs; they even get paid royalties if their music is played on radios and TV etc. Writers (even the WGA) also get a share from the sales of their work, and if a story becomes successful and something else is done with it permission is needed. But what about painters, sculptors, graphic artists, photographers etc., are they entitled to royalties too? According to the EU, yes. We artists are entitled to a share of a resale of our work. Ie if a painting I sold 5 years ago is sold today, I am entitled to a percentage of that sale. This was established in Directive 2001/84/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of the 27th September, 2001 on the Resale Right for the Benefit of the Author of a Work of Art.
The reasoning behind the directive is the following - When someone sells a house (or anything else) he does not expect any share from profits made by the resale of the property say 20 years later. Shouldn’t it be the same for paintings? No. What really contributes to the increase in value of an art piece? Is it some attribute pertaining to the present owner or is it the direct result of what the artist did during his career and who the artist has become after a lifetime of work? For a piece of art to increase in its value from when it was first sold there needs to be some basic conditions namely;
1 – the artist and work of art have to be good;
2 – the artist made a name for himself;
3 – the artist is either dead or at the peak of his career.

So an artist today still contributes to the value of a piece of art he sold 30 years ago! I did some research and discovered the following:-
* The Maltese Government has issued a legal notice in 2006, L.N. 174 of 2006 to implement the directive. While asking around, up until now, I have met no artist or their heirs that know about the legal notice.
* The successors in title, ie the artist’s heirs, are only entitled to benefit from the royalties after 2010 or after 2012 if the minister deems it fit. This means that if a painting is sold today, an artist will get the royalties but if tonight he goes to meet the creator and the painting is sold tomorrow his wife/children etc will not receive a penny.
* Royalties are only due if the resale is conducted by a resale professional; this means artists are not due any royalties if the sale is private, ie only if the sale is conducted through an art gallery or an auction etc.
* The royalty shall be calculated as follows
(a) 0% for the portion of the sale price up to and including euros 1,499
(b) 4% for the portion of the sale price from euros 1,500 to euros 50,000
(c) 3% for the portion of the sale price from euros 50,000.01 to euros 200,000
(d) 1% for the portion of the sale price from euros 200,000.01 to euros 350,000
(e) 0.5% for the portion of the sale price from euros 350,000.01 to euros 500,000
(f) 0.25% for the portion of the sale price exceeding euros 500,000 Provided that the total amount of royalty may not exceed euros 12,500 and the sale prices referred to above are net of tax.
The resale right may be exercised by the holder independently or through a collecting society operating under the conditions provided for in the Copyright Act and regulations made thereunder.
What I am interested to know is how are these royalties being collected and who is collecting them? What sort of mechanisms are there to check that royalties are paid?
I think I need to do some more research.

Are you a specialist?

Zebbug 60x40 2007

Lately, on two different blogs, one by artist Matt Lamb, the other by Sunil Gangadharan on Art & Perception, the issue if to specialize or to generalize was discussed. What should an artist do, limit his subjects and choice of media or experiment in different directions with different materials and subjects?

On a matter of principal, I do not understand why one has to exclude the other. I think that an accomplished artist needs both in his career; the notion of the Renaissance man still holds, even today. People like Leonardo, Bernini, and Michelangelo etc were capable of being good at more than one discipline, so why not adopt the same approach today?

On a practical level, I realised that I follow certain patterns when it comes to my work. I find myself going through periods of experimentation and then long phases of specialisation. There are two reasons I do this; firstly because at a certain stage I find myself exhausting a particular style/subject so I need to change and secondly if I do not experiment every now and again I am afraid that my work will become stagnant and does not evolve.

Passion

When I was young, I had the opportunity to study art under various Maltese artists. One way or another, I learnt something from all of them. But I feel that two particular artists have affected me more than others, Harry Alden and Alfred Chircop. Alden taught me what painting is. It was him that installed in me the belief that an artist, has to know not only how to paint but also had to know his media; paints canvasses, materials etc. You are as good as your technique is.

Chircop infected me with something different, a virus called passion. I never heard the guy say something positive about his pupil’s work. The most we could get was “I don’t dislike!” He taught us that technique is not enough, you could teach a machine to be technically perfect but as artists we have to give something more. Technique without passion is soulless.

Passion in art is something very difficult to explain and to understand, you have to experience it. The first time I visited an exhibition of works by Chircop way back in the early nineties, I understood what he meant.

Lately I visited his latest exhibition, a collection of watercolour paintings held at the Middlesea House, Floriana. Though probably the artist is in his mid-seventies, his work is still young and fresh. The exhibition will be open till the 15th of April 2007. Not to be missed!

...

Alfred Chircop - Watercolour 51x37 cm 2001

here we go again

After an absence of more than a year i decided to start writing again. The idea is that I shall be using this blog mainly as an art diary, but since a lot of things usually piss me off probably i will be writing on other stuff too.

Today i finished this painting. As usual i had a problem giving it a name and since i believe that leaving a painting untitled, is the equivalent of leaving it soulless, i wasted an hour looking at it before deciding.

building composition in black, red & orange